Worth Keeping: Global Perspectives on Best Practice in Missionary Retention

"Worth Keeping is more than worth just reading. I urge church and missional leaders to reflect on the research and absorb the principles contained in this important volume. I am convinced if we put into practice its recommendations we will see more effective missionaries who feel valued as servants of the living God. Worth Keeping should be required reading for all mission leaders and local church mission teams." - Geoff Tunnicliffe, International Director, World Evangelical Alliance, Canada This book was published in partnership with the World Evangelical Alliance.

• Language: English
• Publisher: William Carey Library
• Release date: Jun 1, 2007
• ISBN: 9781645080664

Book preview

Section A

Viewing the site:

Section A sets the scene, explains the layout of the book, provides help in getting started, and presents the history and background to the project.

1

Worth Reading

The Blueprint

In your hands you hold the secrets to success…

A self-help book would begin as above, then espouse some ethereal solution to the pressing problem you may not even be aware you had! Unlike the myriad of self-help books available, this book is based on facts—and not just facts, but robust statistical results from the largest research study ever undertaken on world mission.

Why read this book?

Here are a few reasons why this study is worth reading:

Forty-percent of the world mission workforce was represented in the study.

The study was undertaken by the Mission Commission of the World Evangelical Alliance, a worldwide network of mission and church leaders representing mission movements in more than 70 countries.

Twenty-two countries on six continents were represented.

Denominational and inter-denominational agencies, as well as churches sending directly to the field, were represented.

Major differences between the best and worst mission agencies were uncovered.

We have written with mission practitioners, church leaders and mission agency leaders in mind.

We aim to identify the best practices that make the difference between having mission agency partners who serve effectively long-term rather than ineffectively short-term.

The missionaries in high retaining agencies average 17 years service—in low retaining agencies they average just seven years!

Why read this chapter?

As we began to write, we realized that it is unlikely this book will be read from cover to cover by anyone other than the writers and editors; therefore, why write in that style? Instead, we have set out to write a reference book you can dip into; a book in which you can turn to the section pertaining to a specific issue, get a handle on it, and find help on how to address it in your organisation. It is designed with a clear layout to help you find your way around…but, to do so effectively you must read this chapter. This chapter is your blueprint.

blue•print (blü’ prīnt’)

1. A detailed plan of action.

2. A model or prototype.

3. Something intended as a guide for making something else; a blueprint for a house.

A blueprint helps you to know how things fit together and how to begin building what you want to see come into existence. However… a blueprint does not build for you, nor is the end product the plans and drawings of a blueprint, but it is the house, office or cathedral. In the same way, this book is not designed to be an end product, but rather a guide to good materials and building techniques. You need to identify the building blocks of best practice appropriate to your organisation and assemble them in a style appropriate to your context.

How this book is organised

Section A – Viewing the site

This section introduces you to the book and how to use it, presents the previous study (ReMAP)—what it was, what it did and what it achieved—and then gives an overview of the follow up study (ReMAP II) on which this book is based, highlighting some key findings and implications.

Section B – The building blocks

This section comprises the bulk of the book, with each chapter covering a key issue that is a building block of best practice. In the case of a particularly large or complicated issue, there are sub-chapters focused on a particular aspect. All these chapters have the same layout marked with icons to allow easy navigation. Each chapter takes you through the key facts, the supporting data, key findings from the data, real world application, and examples from around the world.

Section C – Construction… in the real world

You may decide that this study gives the building blocks for a code of best practice which you can develop appropriate to your own context, be that organisational, national or regional level. However, putting together a meaningful and workable code of best practice requires care, effort and skill. Richard Tiplady, who oversaw the development of the Code of Best Practice for Short Term Mission in the UK shares insight and techniques on how to do this. There is also a copy of the questionnaire and a full index for ease of reference.

Getting an overview

The scoring

As part of the chapter headings and data tables, a simple graphical score indicates health or ill-health in an area, according to survey results. More white dots mean greater health, more black dots mean greater ill-health; or, to put it a different way, many black dots indicate an area requiring improvement.

Example:

Icons used in this book

The key facts: this icon indicates key points from the chapter’s topic.

The data: a table showing the statistical results in an easy-to-read style (see page 6 for more detail).

The key findings: the important highlights of a topic or sub-topic, summarised in bullet form for quick overview.

What it means: here the data is discussed—why is the issue important and what effect does it have on retaining missionaries?

Case study: a case study from the real world of missions.

In the real world: a chart to provide some clear, practical ways to put the research findings into practice for your organisation (see page 7 for more detail).

Website indicator: a mark to help you quickly identify where to get more information (see page 7 for more detail).

The data

Each chapter displays a data table, which contains a summary of responses to questions in the ReMAP II questionnaire. We have two categories: Old Sending Countries (OSC)—Australia, Europe, and North America, and New Sending Countries (NSC)—Africa, Asia, and South America, as often the answers from these two groups were significantly different.

For most chapters in Section B, a Health Score was derived from the average rating¹ on organisational practices by adding a 5 for each very high score (5-6), and subtracting a 2 for each mediocre rating (3-4) and subtracting a 5 for each low rating (0-2). This number was then reduced to the lower full digit and displayed in the data table as the number of white dots. In a few chapters (namely 6, 7 and 8), we determined how important a factor is for the selection of new mission candidates, so we have an Importance for Selection instead of a Health Score.

The data table also highlights which factors are correlated strongly with missionary retention—this is shown with a tick.

In the real world - the integral tables

Every chapter ends with an integral table. The tables are designed to stimulate seeking best practice through partnership. The question raised is: Who can do what, when?

Looking at the table from the top-down on the far left column are the stages of the sending process. However, the first row highlights tasks that should be done continuously.

At the top, from left to right you see the missionary partners. Who might you think of when you see the broad categories of partners?

1. Home Church: Local Church, Church Mission Agency, Home Front Committee, Family

2. Missionary: Missionary, Partner, Child(ren)

3. Mission agencies: (Inter)National Agency, Agency/Partner on the field

4. External partners: Umbrella organizations (for example WEA Missions Commission or National Mission Movements), Specialists (Member Care, etc.), Training Institutes

The integral tables provide examples—they are not meant as a final answer and they are certainly not complete. In fact, they are purposely left incomplete, as we hope you start to think about what is already being done and are provoked to think of more ideas, even new ideas.

Please write about your own unique experiences and send us your case studies so we can make them available for others through the website or in a possible reprint of this book. What we really hope is that through thoughtful efforts, the link between the missionary world and the church is strengthened and the full potential of all partners is employed in strategic ways.

The website

This book has been written for church leaders, mission partners and mission agency leaders as the primary audiences. It has not been written for statisticians who want to analyse the figures, but rather for leaders and practitioners who want to use the findings to improve their own or their organisation’s effectiveness in building the Kingdom of God. So if you think standard deviation sounds like something you could be arrested for—look no further, this book provides everything you need to use the results from the survey. It seeks to give enough data to understand the results, but not so much that you get lost in the detail.

However, the study is based on extensive statistical research and for those that want to delve deeper there are more technical details on-line at the website, www.worthkeeping.info. So if statistical data is important to you, please go online. There are many other resources and further case studies available at the website, as well as space for sharing your own examples of best practice and room to dialogue with others around the world who are reading Worth Keeping.

The other piece of the jigsaw

Also on the website you will find details of several studies that have been or are being conducted to find out what answers individual missionaries give when asked what issues could cause or have caused them to leave the mission field. For details of these and to take part, please go to www.worthkeeping.info/individuals

Where to start

If you want to know more about the study and its background go straight on to chapters 2 and 3. If you are ready to get stuck in with a particular issue just go to one of the issue chapters 4-33 or if you need more help logon to www.worthkeeping.info and click Where to start.

1 See page 32 for more details.

2

ReMAP I

What ReMAP I said, did, and achieved

Detlef Blöcher

Introduction

We all know them, missionaries who departed from home with great enthusiasm, convinced that the Lord sent them—then returning after a short time with broken hearts and shattered vision, and now facing their disappointed home church and confused supporters. Why did it go wrong? What could have been done to prevent these tragic events?

At the 1993 National Missions Congress in Caxambu, Brazil, participants were shocked at the report given by a respected Brazilian missionary leader that 75% of that nation’s cross-cultural missionaries quit their posts during their initial five-year term of service or don’t return after the first furlough. Could a 20% per annum attrition figure possibly be true? None of the participants at the congress could confirm or refute the figure. There were simply no reliable data available.

Survey

This was the reason why the Mission Commission of the World Evangelical Alliance launched a comprehensive research project on missionary attrition called Reducing Missionary Attrition Project (ReMAP I). How many missionaries do actually return home and for what reasons? In addition, the new vibrant mission movement of Latin America, Africa and Asia had recently boomed. How do the new missionary sending countries (NSC) differ from the older missionary sending countries of North America, Europe and Australia (OSC)?

The staff of the World Evangelical Alliance Mission Commission (WEA-MC) designed the study process, and it was initially led by Rodolfo Girón, President of the Latin American mission movement COMIBAM and member of the MC’s Executive Committee. Fourteen representative countries were selected, each with a sizeable mission force and an organised evangelical mission movement so that reliable data and a good return rate could be expected. They included countries from North America (USA, Canada), Latin America (Costa Rica, Brazil), Africa (Ghana, Nigeria), Europe (Denmark, Germany, Great Britain), Asia (India, Philippines, Singapore, South Korea) and Australia. A country coordinator from each country was chosen to administrate the survey. These leaders gathered in London (February 1995) and identified 26 specific causes of missionary attrition that they felt were of primary concern. With these issues in mind, the survey instrument was designed.

For practical and strategic reasons, the survey addressed mission leaders instead of individual missionaries for the following reasons: (1) the decision makers in their organisations are the ones who ultimately implement needed change, (2) mission leaders have a good overview and could present a more comprehensive and aggregate perspective, (3) working only with a single mission executive for each agency allowed the survey to be manageable, and (4) a higher return rate could be expected. Organisers understood that such a survey could also stimulate mission leaders’ prayerful reflection on why they were losing valuable people from the field and could fuel their thinking on critical issues and show them practical solutions.

The researchers were aware of the different perspectives on why a missionary chooses to discontinue his/her ministry. Some reasons are explained in the missionary’s prayer letter (called stated reasons), while additional reasons are revealed to his/her close friends/family (personal reasons). He/she may even believe in another set of reasons deep in his/her heart (secret reasons). The team or field leader may identify leader’s reasons but only a subset may go on file (recorded reasons), the sending base director may believe in another array of reasons (believed reasons) and in the mission’s journal socially accepted reasons may be published, and the missionary’s professional counsellor may identify further reasons, while the true reasons may be a combination of all of these—or even be different again. In fact, in most cases it is not one reason alone but often a whole range of reasons that all contribute to the decision. All of these perspectives are true insights, yet none of them are complete without the others. ReMAP I focused on the mission leaders’ believed reasons because of the important process outcomes expected by having executive leadership involved. The study organisers urged agency leadership to collect data from members of their own organisations in ways that were both non-threatening and could help prevent unwanted attrition. Further studies are presently under way to listen to the missionaries’ story and hear their voice. (See www.worthkeeping.info for further details.)

ReMAP I was designed to help missions leaders to take a reality check on their agencies and their national attrition and to seek for creative solutions to this costly problem. The success of the project would need to be measured by an overall reduction of missionary attrition, particularly among the mission agencies that participated in the study. This called for a follow-up study.

The second ReMAP study (ReMAP II) did indeed confirm a major improvement in attrition, particularly in the mission movements of the New Sending Countries (NSC).¹ As in the first study, data on attrition was collected from all the participating countries and compared, but there were some major differences in the two studies. While the ReMAP I study primarily considered personal reasons for the return of missionaries (from the mission executives’ perspective), the follow-up study ReMAP II (Retaining Missionaries: Agency Practices) focused (1) on missionary retention and (2) on organisational issues: which structures and organisational practices keep missionaries in service, what makes their ministry fruitful?

ReMAP II was done eight years after the first study when the impact of the organisational changes initiated by ReMAP I would have been felt. While this encourages us to claim some credit for the overall improvement in attrition, in reality it is impossible to know how significant an influence ReMAP I actually had. The second study was not a replication study in the classical sense and this blurs our ability to pinpoint any cause-effect correlations. We do know, however, that the publication that stemmed from the ReMAP I study: Too Valuable to Lose: Examining the Causes and Cures of Missionary Attrition² was translated into four languages and widely used by agencies in discussing attrition. Anecdotal evidence for the effectiveness of this process driven research is also strong.

The original ReMAP I questionnaire asked the leaders of sending agencies for their practices and procedures as well as their number of returnees in the years 1992-94, and they were also asked to identify their predominant believed reasons for the return of their missionaries. Four hundred and fifty-five mission agencies with 23,000 long-term missionaries participated in the study and they reported 4,400 returnees in the years 1992-94—this sheer number exemplifies the scope of global missionary attrition and the need to work on this issue. The national break-down of participating agencies was as follows: Australia (44 agencies), Brazil (22), Canada (13), Costa Rica (6), Denmark (10), Germany (20), Ghana (52), Great Britain (37), India (20), Nigeria (14), Philippines (18), Singapore (7), South Korea (54), USA (114). Agencies from the New Sending Countries of Africa, Asia and Latin America (NSC) were analysed separately from those of the Old Sending Countries (OSC) of Europe and North America. OSCS and NSCS refer to agencies with low attrition, thus they receive a S mark for superior. OSCW and NSCW refer to agencies with high attrition, thus receiving a W mark for worse.

Causes of attrition

The attrition rate was calculated as the annual number of returnees divided by the number of active missionaries on the field of this agency³. In OSC 7.1 ± 0.3% of the active missionaries⁴ (that is seven out of 100 active missionaries) leave their agency each year, which is about one out of 14 missionaries. This percentage is slightly higher than in the new and enthusiastic mission movement of NSC which loses only 6.4 ± 0.4% of its workforce each year (one out of 16 missionaries). As the aim of the study was to reduce missionary attrition, we distinguished between unpreventable attrition (i.e., regular retirement, death in service, completion of project) and potentially preventable reasons such as personal (i.e., emotional problems, immoral lifestyle), family (i.e., children’s education, marriage problems), team (i.e., conflicts with co-missionaries), agency (i.e., financial problems, disagreement with leadership), work-related (i.e., personal dissatisfaction, lack of performance or training) and cultural reasons (i.e., unsuccessful cultural adjustment, language learning deficits).⁵ Obviously there are more normal retirement and end of projects in OSC. Their unpreventable attrition rate (UAR) is almost three times higher (2.5 ± 0.14% per year) compared to NSC (0.93 ± 0.11% per year). Thus one third of the OSC returnees come home for unavoidable reasons, while two thirds (4.5 ± 0.2% per year) leave for potentially preventable reasons. In NSC, 6 out of 7 returnees come home for potentially preventable reasons, which amounts to 5.5 ± 0.3% per year. Figure 1 gives the break down of the groups of reasons for OSC and NSC as identified by their mission leaders (the two central columns in each set of bars). According to the executives’ insights, personal reasons dominate among the preventable reasons, followed by agency- and work related reasons. Agency- and team-related reasons are more important in the new mission movement of the South which is assumed to still be maturing its mission structures and policies.

As the aim of the study was to examine missionary attrition, agencies were grouped according to their potentially preventable attrition rate (PAR) into three blocks of equal numbers of missionaries: low (S-superior), middle (M) or high (W-worst) attrition.⁶ These subgroups were compared with the full sample to identify patterns for excellence. The peripheral bars in Figure 1 (OSCS, NSCS) give the percentage of returnees of agencies with low attrition. Their total attrition rate is 3.0 ± 0.2% (OSCS) which is only 42% of that in OSC, respectively 1.3 ± 0.2% in NSCS, which is only one-fifth of that in NSC. As these attrition rates are based on the actual performance of the sizeable subgroup of low attrition agencies (one third of the missionaries in the total sample) and not on abstract definitions or theoretical circumstances, the numbers demonstrate the huge room for organisational improvement. Indeed, two-thirds of all missionary attrition could have possibly been avoided.

Fig. 1: Reasons for Attrition

To our great surprise, even the rate for unpreventable attrition (UAR) comes down. At first this fact sounds illogical, but we need to keep in mind that the definition of unpreventable attrition includes reasons like: completion of contract, end of project, political unrest and marriage to a person outside the mission family—and these reasons are not absolutely fixed but can possibly be influenced by good member care, effective mission structures and opportunities for reassignment after the completion of a project. Figure 1 shows that low attrition agencies have indeed reduced their unpreventable attrition by 50%.

Fig. 2: Most Important Believed Reasons for Attrition

The reduction of preventable attrition is even larger. Figure 1 shows that the personal, family, team, agency, and work-related attrition have been reduced to one fifth in NSCS (compared to the full sample NSC) and to one third in OSCS—yet agency-related attrition is more resistant to reduction in OSC.⁷ These impressive facts prove that the majority of attrition cases could have indeed be prevented. Figure 2 gives the definitions of the various groups of reasons. Mission executives were also asked to identify those seven factors out of the list of 26 important reasons which they consider most important in the return of their missionary.

Figure 2 gives the percentage of all missionaries of the samples whose leaders had ticked the stated issue as one of the seven most important reasons. In OSC Regular retirement was considered the prime factor, followed by Health problems, Missionary children and their education, Project end, Low self-esteem, Conflicts with co-missionaries, Marriage outside the mission, Lack of spiritual or financial support, Lack of job satisfaction, Disagreements over policies and Marriage problems. These factors need special attention in OSC when agencies work on their policies and practices. In low attrition agencies (OSCS), Retirement, Health problems, Missionary children, Conflicts with co-missionaries, Low self-esteem, Lack of spiritual and financial support and Lack of job-satisfaction have gained in relative importance compared to OSC, while Project end, Marriage outside the mission, Disagreement over policies, Marriage problems and Care for elderly parents have lost in significance. The latter issues have been cared for well so that they are not large factors in attrition.

In NSC agencies, Lack of missionary’s commitment was considered as the prime cause, followed by Moral failure, Lack of spiritual and financial support, Health problems, Doubt about calling, Conflicts with co-missionaries, Disagreements over policies, Lack of supervision, Project end, Spiritual immaturity, Relational problems with local leaders at the place of service, Dismissal by agency, Missionary children, Normal retirement and Marriage outside the mission. These are the greatest challenges to NSC missionaries and the leaders have to wrestle with these issues. This list is completely different from that for OSC and it mainly exposes inefficient candidate selection and lack of personal support. In NSC agencies with low attrition NSCS, Disagreement over policies, Spiritual immaturity, Doubt about calling, Moral failure, and Marriage outside the mission gained in relative weight, while Lack of commitment, Lack of spiritual and financial support, Lack of supervision, Project end, Dismissal by agency had lost significance. Organisational issues have apparently been dealt with well so that personal issues have gained in relevance, which is related to careful candidate selection and personal support during service. These topics direct the road to excellence for NSC agencies.

How to further reduce missionary attrition

As we were particularly interested in how to reduce missionary attrition, mission executives were also given a list of 12 important issues (listed in Figure 3), and asked (a) to select the three factors they believed to be most effective in further reducing their missionary attrition and (b) to identify the three factors which they felt to be the least important factors on the list of 12 important factors. Figure 3 gives the percentage of missionaries from the samples whose mission leaders selected the mentioned factor to be one of the three top factors to further reduce their missionary attrition.

Fig. 3: Factors Believed to Further Reduce Missionary Attrition

In OSC, A clear sense of God’s calling into mission service is considered as the most important topic, named by the leaders of more than 70% of all OSC missionaries in the survey. It was followed by Supportive family, Good relationships with co-missionaries, Ability to adapt to different culture and learn new language and Maintaining a healthy personal spiritual life. In the low attrition subgroup OSCS, Calling is still the prime factor yet with a smaller percentage (apparently it has been dealt with effectively and thus lost in significance), while Adaptability to a different culture and learning language and Maintenance of personal spiritual life have gained in significance.

In NSC agencies Clear calling is considered most important, followed by Maintenance of personal spiritual life, Regular financial support and Supervision. Good relationships with missionary colleagues, Supportive family and Adaptability to language and culture come next, yet with a much lower rating than in OSC. In the low attrition subgroup NSCS, Clear calling has received an even higher rating at the expense of Maintenance of personal spiritual life, Regular financial support and Supervision. The latter have apparently been dealt with well in these agencies. The rating of NSCS appears to lean more towards that in OSC.

In order to further pinpoint the most important issues, we subtracted the percentage of missionaries whose leaders had rated an issue as one of the three less important issues out of the 12 stated issues (3Min) from the percentages of 3Max, resulting in a differential percentage of missionaries (3Max-3Min) which runs from 80% to –80%⁸. Figure 4 gives the results which further highlight the prime role of Clear calling, followed by Supportive family, Relationships with co-missionaries, Adaptability to language and culture and Maintenance of personal spiritual life. These are the five big issues in OSC, and they are also the most important issues in the low attrition agencies OSCS, although in revised order. Adaptability to language and culture and Personal spiritual life had gained in relevance at the expense of Calling and Supportive family. The latter have apparently been dealt with so well that it will not yield in further reduction of missionary attrition.

Fig. 4: Factors Believed to Further Reduce Missionary Attrition (3Max - 3Min)

In NSC agencies Calling is even more dominant, followed by Maintenance of personal spiritual life, Regular financial support, Good relationships with missionary colleagues and Supervision. In the low attrition subgroup NSCS Maintenance of personal spiritual life, Supervision and Regular financial support have apparently been solved so well that additional investment in these areas would not further reduce their missionary attrition. Yet, Supportive family, Adaptability to language and culture, Relationship to superiors, Stress cope-ability and Continuous training have gained in relative weight. These issues need careful consideration as agencies work on their organisational development.

In order to further reduce unwanted missionary attrition we explored correlations between various agency characteristics and preventable attrition (PAR).

Agency size

Figure 5 gives the preventable attrition rate (PAR) as a function of agency size, demonstrating that small agencies lose a huge percentage of their workers.⁹ PAR falls with agency size, reaching the baseline at an agency size of 50+ active missionaries. This correlation is observed in OSC and NSC. Further studies have shown that small agencies have less structure and expertise, but not to the extent to explain this huge difference in attrition rates. It appears that a critical mass of missionaries for survival on the field, a balanced mix of gifting and experience in a ministry team, and specialisation in services in the home office are required to be effective. We believe that this impressive fact directs us to the biblical concept of cooperation and fellowship in ministry that the Lord has commanded us (John 17:21, 1 Cor. 12:4-6, Eph. 4:1-6, 1 Peter 4:10).

Fig. 5: Agency Size

Agency age

Figure 6 gives the preventable attrition rate (PAR) as function of the age of the agency. It is evident that young agencies have an increased attrition rate as they lack experience and have not yet developed their way of operation. PAR comes down as the agency matures, yet old agencies (>100 years) have again an increased attrition rate as they may lose their original vision, dynamic and enthusiasm.

Fig. 6: Agency Age

Candidate selection

Agencies were asked for details of their candidate selection procedure and in particular whether or not they consider 13 specific areas of life (listed in Figure 7). This diagram gives the percentages of the missionaries of the samples that had been checked on this issue during their application procedure. The chart proves that the basics like Calling, Doctrinal position, Physical health examination, Acceptance of present family status (marriage/singleness), Previous experience in church work and Communication and relational skills are considered by most agencies, yet some agencies have deficits regarding Character references, Psychological and personality testing and Communication skills. OSC agencies have somewhat more rigorous procedures than NSC, and low attrition agencies (OSCS, NSCS) invest significantly more in their candidate selection than the total samples.

Fig. 7: Candidate Selection

Careful candidate selection also proved to be one of the decisive areas for reducing missionary attrition. Figure 8 gives the average preventatable attrition rate (PAR) of agencies that had (or not) considered the mentioned area of life as part of their application procedure. The diagram proves that Health Examination, Missionary’s calling, Acceptance of the present family status (marriage/singleness), Character references, Firm financial support of the home church/supporters or applied Psychological or personality testing are critical areas and agencies that did not check them suffered an increased attrition rate.

Fig. 8: Preventable Attrition and Candidate Selection

This fact is also demonstrated in Figure 9, giving the average preventable attrition rate (PAR) depending on the number of areas covered in the agency’s selection procedure. Again it proves the significance of careful candidate selection: agencies with little or careless candidate selection suffer greatly increased preventable attrition.

Fig. 9: Candidate Selection

Pre-field training

Fig. 10: Pre-field Training

Another critical area is pre-field training. Figure 10 gives the percentage of all missionaries of the samples whose agencies expect the mentioned pre-field training for acceptance of new missionaries.¹⁰ Most agencies provide their Own missiological course as well as an Orientation programme, yet missiological training is not always required. It is obvious that agencies with low attrition have higher requirements regarding missiological training. This evidence is further emphasised in Figure 11, which gives the average preventable attrition rate (PAR) of agencies that do or do not expect this type of training from their new missionaries. The results show that missiological training and cross-cultural experience are of great value for mission longevity. Figure 12 shows PAR depends on the total number of training units (mentioned in Figure 11) expected by the agency from their new missionaries and again proves the correlation between high training standards and low attrition (consider overlap in the training modules of Figure 10).

Fig. 11: Preventable Attrition and Pre-field Training

Care for missionaries on the field

Figure 13 shows the percentage of field missionaries of the sample that are provided with a certain service on the field. Most of the missionaries (nine out of ten) get Supervision on the field, yet not all are supplied with the other provisions. Annual leave, Effective missionary team, MK-schooling and Member care by a person other than field leader are more important to OSC agencies, while NSC agencies put stronger emphasis on Regular communication with home churches, Field conferences and Annual visit from the home office.

Fig. 12: Pre-field Training

Fig. 13: Services for Missionaries on the Field

In general NSC agencies provide the same amount of services to their missionaries as OSC, and low attrition agencies do not provide more than the total group. It appears that services on the field in themselves do not keep missionaries in ministry, unless thwey are predated by careful candidate selection and pre-field training.

The effect of member care is shown in Figure 14, giving the preventable attrition rate (PAR) in dependence on the amount of total staff time invested in member care for NSC. It is obvious that agencies with little member care suffer very high preventable attrition. PAR declines with the investment in member care up to a time—8% of the total organisational time (at home and on the field). Beyond this value, PAR increased again. Can there be a ‘too much’ member care? Indeed, if mission teams are too much concerned about their internal relationships at the expense of their ministry and looking out for unusual emotional feelings they may even cause what they expect. Agencies known for their intensive member care may also be approached by unsuitable candidates and their home office may be inclined to accept them trusting on the good care on the field, but in most cases such graciousness will not pay off. In addition we need to keep in mind that we just estimate the amount of member care, but not its quality.

Fig 14: Member Care

Summary

The ReMAP I study has been one of the first global studies on missionary attrition, particularly in comparing the older and newer mission movements. It has identified a number of critical areas in candidate selection, pre-field training, leadership, organisational structure, and member care that have a tremendous impact on missionary attrition.

The characteristics of agencies with very low return rates can serve as models. Their example will direct the way for reducing unwanted loss of missionaries. Member care is not a department added on to the administration, but a characteristic feature that determines the overall operations: a shepherd’s heart.

Yet missionary attrition is just the tip of an iceberg. Many more missionaries are worn out by personal concerns, frustrations and disappointment that deplete their energy and joy and reduce their effectiveness—but they may not have the courage to face reality and go home. Therefore, the issues mentioned above have a much wider scope than just missionary attrition. They relate to the effectiveness of all missionaries.

Moreover, we do not consider reduction of missionary attrition as an end in itself, unless the missionary is really productive in a vital ministry. Missionaries can be ill-placed or be unsuitable for a given task and in need of reassignment or to be brought home with grace and dignity. Wounded and tired missionaries need restoration and our full compassion. Missionaries can also stay for too long and thus hinder the development of local leadership instead of moving on to a new ministry. Mission agencies need specific criteria for completion of a project and a clear exit-strategy before even starting a project.

What ReMAP I did

Statistics are of limited value. They serve to provide information to decision makers so that they can make organisational changes and improvements. In the example given in the introduction statistical information was desperately needed to clarify what turned out to be disinformation that was very discouraging. To their relief, ReMAP I showed Brazilian mission leaders that their national annual attrition rate was actually 8.5 ± 0.9% and not the 20% as claimed by that speaker (some agencies have indeed lost 20% per year but these are individual agencies and/or exceptional years). Still, the national attrition rate was of great concern as their preventable attrition rate, PAR, was 50% higher than the global average. Follow-up on the study encouraged mission agency, Bible school, and church leadership to prayerfully discuss their procedures and practices, and to implement needed change. The result of putting the spotlight on attrition is found in the follow-up study ReMAP II, where the Brazilian national preventable attrition rate was down to 2.6%, one-third of what it was eight years before. This statistic points to the massive improvements—improvements that are saving the mission careers of at least 250 Brazilian missionaries each year. ReMAP I claims modest credit for these marvellous results.

The ReMAP I study developed a survey tool for in-house attrition studies used by various agencies to analyse where and when they lost their valuable missionaries and to take appropriate action.

Without a doubt, the ReMAP I study drew great attention to the key issue of missionary agency member care and has given a tremendous boost to those concerned about these issues around the world. A Mission Commission Member Care Network (MemCa) was spawned with the development of various national and international member networks and the publication of numerous member care resources. Their internet site offers (www.membercare.org) a number of resources. Only by the mutual sharing of expertise has this been possible.

Likewise, the agencies’ minimal requirements in missiological training have grown in the past eight years as ReMAP I has highlighted the importance of missionary training. In 1994 only 6% of the OSC missionaries were expected to hold an academic degree in missiology. In 2002 it had increased to 23%. And the percentage of missionaries expected to have formal missiological training increased from 29% to 35%.

Attrition issues have spotlighted the need for whole person or integral missionary training. Integral training concepts of including substantial informal and practical missionary training have been developed, especially in the newer sending countries. Increased international attention has been focused on this through another Mission Commission affiliate, the International Missionary Training Network (www.missionarytraining.com). ReMAP I has also promoted the continuous training of missionaries. Many leading missionary institutions have developed long-distance programmes for academic and practical missionary training and flexible units adaptable to the needs and time frames of missionaries. Missionaries are not trained once for life, but are growing into a lifestyle of life-long learning.

ReMAP II shows that candidate selection procedures have grown tremendously in the past eight years, especially in NSC. The percentage of missionaries asked for character references has grown from 54% to 99% in the past eight years. 92% (instead of formerly 77%) have physical examinations and 64% (instead of 37%) received psychological testing. Similar evidence is found in the areas of calling, ministry experience in their home church and acceptance of the present marital status—and also for OSC. Statistical information helps agencies understand the critical areas that need to be clarified before the acceptance of a new missionary.

One real benefit of international studies such as ReMAP I and II is the level of cooperation that must be evoked to carry it out both internationally and on a national scale. These relationships don’t end when the study is finished. Thus, national alliances are strengthened as agencies work together. The German Evangelical Mission Alliance (AEM), for example, has recently set up payroll services for smaller mission agencies to provide the extensive expertise to cope with the constant changes in labour laws and social security. Without a doubt, both ReMAP studies have brought significant cohesion to participating national mission movements.

It is difficult to tell which of these improvements has been the direct result of the ReMAP process, yet the bottom line is that over the past eight years the missionary attrition rate in NSC has dropped by 50% and also remained low in OSC in spite of the global trend towards shorter appointments and frequent career changes. This is an example of how process focused mission research can draw attention to critical issues, stimulate organisational development, and ultimately foster change leading to greater effectiveness in extending the Kingdom of God. ReMAP I has certainly helped keep many more missionaries in service and make their ministry even more fruitful, releasing blessing to the nations of the world and honour to God.

1 Detlef Blöcher, ReMAP II Affirms the Maturation of the Younger Mission Movement of the South, Connections: The Journal of the WEA Mission Commission, (Oct.. 2003), p. 48-53.

2 William D. Taylor, ed., Too Valuable to Lose: Examining the Causes and Cures of Missionary Attrition, (Pasadena, CA: William Carey Library, 1997).

3 The attrition rate has not been corrected for the number of newly arrived missionaries which should be subtracted from the number of active missionaries. Therefore agencies with dynamic growth or high turnover rate underestimate their actual attrition rate. Detlef Blöcher & Jonathan Lewis, Further findings in the research data. Appendix B: Correction for rapidly growing agencies, Taylor, Too Valuable to Los e, 1997,

Reviews for Worth Keeping

[Al · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

This is an excellent resource to help provide clarity on the needs of missionaries and how organizations can help them flourish.